Inclusion in Netflix Original U.S. Scripted Series & Films - Dr. Stacy L. Smith, Dr. Katherine Pieper, Marc Choueiti, Kevin Yao, Ariana Case ...
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
Inclusion in Netflix Original U.S.
Scripted Series & Films
Dr. Stacy L. Smith, Dr. Katherine Pieper, Marc Choueiti,
Kevin Yao, Ariana Case,
Karla Hernandez & Zoe Moore
FULL REPORT
February 2021INCLUSION IN NETFLIX ORIGINAL U.S. SCRIPTED FILMS & SERIES
The purpose of this paper was to overview inclusion on screen (i.e., gender, race/ethnicity, LGBTQ, disability) and behind the
camera (i.e., directors, writers, producers) across live action Netflix U.S. original fictional films and scripted series.1 The sample
included 126 movies and 180 scripted series released by the entertainment company during the 2018 and 2019 calendar years.
Below, the results are presented by inclusion indicator (i.e., gender, race/ethnicity, LGBTQ, disability).2 On certain measures, the
inclusion profile of Netflix films and series was evaluated over time (2018 vs. 2019) and against industry metrics. Throughout the
paper, only differences of 5 percentage points or greater were deemed significant. This approach was consistent with our previ-
ous work and used to avoid making noise about meaningless deviation (1-2%).3 The letter “n” appears throughout the document,
which illuminates sample size per row, column or cell analyzed.
GENDER
Within this section, we assess the distribution of gender on screen and behind the camera across two years of Netflix films and
series. For some indicators, we not only compare males to females but also look at gender differences yearly (2018 vs. 2019) and
within medium (film vs. scripted series). Industry comparisons were provided on certain measures by utilizing our own top-gross-
ing film reports as well as studies on scripted or episodic content by other scholars and groups.
On Screen
TABLE 1
On screen charactersPERCENTAGE
were assessed OF for gender in multiple
FEMALE-IDENTIFIED ways. First,
LEADS/CO we BY
LEADS looked at who drove
STORYTELLING the storyline.
PLATFORM AND YEAR In film, this was the
number of movies with a female-identified lead/co lead that centered the unfolding narrative. To create a comparable measure
for scripted series, we MEASURE
looked at the number of shows where FILMgirls and women wereSERIES50% or more of series regulars.4
TOTAL
2018 2019 2018 2019
Overall, a total of 52% (n=157) of all Netflix films and scripted series were driven by girls/women which was just over U.S. Census
(50.8%).5 Series (54.5%,
% of female-identified 46.4% film50.9% 50.6% 57.7% 52% of shows with fe-
n=96)
leads/co leadssignificantly outperformed
(n=32)
(48.4%, n=61)
(n=29)
in the number
(n=40)
and percentage
(n=56) (n=157)
male-identified leads/co leads, however (see Table 1). Differences also emerged by year, as 2019 (55.2%, n=85) featured a higher
percentage of storylinesTOTAL
with women and girls than did 48.4%2018 (48.6%,
(n=61) n=72). 54.5% (n=96)
TABLE 1
PERCENTAGE OF FEMALE-IDENTIFIED LEADS/CO LEADS BY STORYTELLING MEDIUM AND YEAR
FILM SERIES
INDICATOR 2018 2019 2018 2019 TOTAL
46.4% 50.9% 50.6% 57.7% 52%
% of female-identified
leads/co leads
(n=32) (n=29) (n=40) (n=56) (n=157)
TOTAL 48.4% (n=61) 54.5% (n=96)
Note: Leads represent the central figure(s) across a story’s plot. In film, two equal protagonists sharing the
central journey of the story were counted as co leads. Scripted series with 50% or more female-identified
series regulars were included as having female leads/co leads.
Not surprisingly, a notable pattern was observed by crossing medium (film vs. series) and year (2018 vs. 2019). Just over half of all
films in 2019 (50.9%, n=29) depicted a female lead/co lead, which was up from 2018 (46.4%, n=32). In series, the uptick was more
pronounced and significant (7.1 percentage points). Fifty-eight percent of scripted shows starred female-identified protagonists
in 2019 (57.7%, n=56) and 50.6% (n=40) in 2018.
Clearly, Netflix storytelling was strongly grounded in gender equality during the time frame evaluated. When we look to see how
Netflix stacked up against the broader industry, the company outperformed top-grossing films. As shown in Table 2, the percent-
age of female leads/co leads in Netflix films (48.4%, n=61) was significantly higher than two years of the most popular movies at
the box office (41%, n=82).6 This advantage was demonstrated in both years evaluated (see Table 2). For series, a comparable
industry statistic for leads was not available and thus that analysis was not conducted.
Page 1TABLE 2
TABLE 2
PERCENTAGE OF FEMALE-IDENTIFIED
PERCENTAGE LEADS/CO
OF FEMALE-IDENTIFIED LEADS/COLEADS INNETFLIX
LEADS IN NETFLIX AND
AND TOP-GROSSING
TOP-GROSSING FILMS FILMS BY YEAR
BY YEAR
INDICATOR 2018 2019 TOTAL
% of Netflix films w/female-
identified leads/co leads
46.4% 50.9% 48.4%
(n=32) (n=29) (n=61)
% of top-grossing films w/female- 39% 43% 41%
identified leads/co leads (n=39) (n=43) (n=82)
Note: A total of 126 Netflix films were included in the analysis and 100 top-grossing fictional films in 2018 and 2019. Both
of these samples had movies driven by ensemble casts. While the ensemble films were counted in the sample total, they
could not qualify as female led or not. This latter distinction was reserved for films driven by only one or two (equal) pro-
tagonists.
Second, we examined the main cast in films and scripted series. Main cast involved series regulars (i.e., recurring roles across a
season as defined by Variety Insight) in scripted shows or primary and secondary roles that drive the plot in movies. For movies,
the main cast was retrieved from the landing page of each film on the Netflix website. It is important to note that the main cast
analysis was different from leads/co leads as we used the character as the unit of analysis in the former analysis and the entire
story in the latter. By focusing on main cast characters, our sample size was much larger than the leads/co leads analysis.
TABLE
TABLE 33
PERCENTAGE OF FEMALE-IDENTIFIED MAIN CAST BY STORYTELLING MEDIUM AND YEAR
FILM SERIES
MEASURE TOTAL
2018 2019 2018 2019
% of female-identified 38.9% 41.1% 46.4% 48% 44.2%
main cast (n=215) (n=195) (n=301) (n=357) (n=1,068)
TOTAL 39.9% (n=410) 47.3% (n=658)
Of the 2,420 main cast characters, 55.8% (n=1,351) were male and 44.1% (n=1,068) were female. Only 1 character within the
main cast analysis was non binary and thus was excluded from the remaining statistics. A higher percentage of female main cast
members were found in series (47.3%, n=658) than in film (39.9%, n=410). A non-meaningful difference was observed from 2018
(42.9%, n=516) to 2019 (45.4%, n=552). No significant patterns emerged when crossing medium by year (see Table 3). Given these
findings, Netflix approached proportional representation with U.S. Census in scripted series in 2018 and 2019 but in neither year
in film.
Lastly, we looked at the percentage of speaking and named characters by gender. A total of 12,168 speaking and named charac-
ters were evaluated across the 126 films (n=4,696) and 172 scripted series (n=7,472). A full 61.2% (n=7,441) were male characters,
38.8% (n=4,724) were female andTABLE 5
TABLE 5
PERCENTAGE OF FEMALE-IDENTIFIED SPEAKING CHARACTERS IN NETFLIX AND INDUSTRY
BY STORYTELLING MEDIUM AND YEAR
FILM SERIES
MEASURE 2018 2019 2018 2019
% of female-identified speaking 35.8% 36.5% 39.9% 41.1%
characters Netflix (n=898) (n=799) (n=1,364) (n=1,663)
% of female-identified speaking 33.1% 34% 40% 45%
characters industry
Note: The film industry comparisons are from the Annenberg Inclusion Initiative report.7 For scripted series, the percentages were
derived from San Diego State University (SDSU). Using the SDSU research, the 2019 cell is reflective of the 2018/19 season whereas the
2018 entry is reflective of the 2017/18 season.
Speaking characters’ gender did not vary by medium (film vs. series) or year (2018 vs. 2019). As shown in Table 4, 36.1% (n=1,697)
of all speaking characters were girls and women in movies and 40.5% (n=3,027) in series. How did Netflix compare with the broad-
er entertainment ecosystem of female-identified speaking characters? As shown in Table 5, the percentage of girls and women on
screen in Netflix films (2018=35.8%, 2019=36.5%) was slightly but non meaningfully higher than the percentage in top-grossing
films in 2018 (33.1%) and 2019 (34%). Looking to series, Netflix was on par with the broader industry in 2018 (39.9% vs. 40%) but
still slightly below industry performance in 2019 (41.1% vs. 45%; see Table 5).
While the aforementioned paragraph illuminates the overall percentage of female-identified speaking and named characters, it
tells us little about how portrayals were distributed across the entire sample. To gauge the diffusion of girls and women on screen,
we asked two additional questions at the film and scripted series level: 1) how many stories featured a gender-balanced cast? and
2) how many narratives erased girls and women on screen? The former tapped proportional representation with U.S. Census
(50.8%) and the latter tapped invisibility or erasure.8
A gender-balanced story was defined as featuring girls and women in 45.7% to 55.9% of all speaking or named roles.9 As shown
in Table 6, 19.9% (n=61) of all stories depicted a gender-balanced narrative. Little deviation emerged by medium, as 16.7% (n=21)
of films and 20% (n=36) of scripted series portrayed proportional representation. Though shy of the significance criterion (e.g., 5
percentage point difference), films in 2019 (19.3%, n=11) tended to show more gender balance on screen than films in 2018 (14.5%,
n=10). There was no meaningful increase observed for gender-balanced casts in series. It is important to note that 15 movies and
23 scripted series across the entire sample exceeded proportional representation. No series or films excluded or rendered girls/
women invisible on screen. Put differently, every story featured at least one girl or woman speaking or named character on screen
across 2018 and 2019 content.
TABLE 6
TABLE 6
GENDER-BALANCE BY STORYTELLING MEDIUM AND YEAR
FILM SERIES TOTAL
14.5% 19.3% 18.8% 21% 19.9%
OR 10 OR 11 OR 15 OR 21 OR 61
FILMS FILMS SERIES SERIES STORIES
2018 2019 2018 2019 2018-19
8 Films 7 films 11 series 12 series 39 stories
exceeded exceeded exceeded exceeded exceeded
proportional proportional proportional proportional proportional
representation representation representation representation representation
ACROSS 2 YEARS, 32.7% OR 100 FILMS AND SCRIPTED SERIES MET OR EXCEEDED PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATION
Note: A gender balanced cast featured girls and/or women in 45.7% to 55.9% of all speaking or named roles. This is a confidence
interval of 10% around the U.S. Census percentage of 50.8%.
Page 3Summing up, Netflix films and series depicted female-identified leads/co leads consistent with or above U.S. population norms.
However, the percentage of females in the main cast and across all speaking or named characters decreased linearly from leads/
co leads. These latter findings represent a missed opportunity, ensuring that main roles as well as those characters with a few lines
or less reflect the broader representational ecosystem where girls and women take up half of the space of humanity.
TABLE
TABLE 7 7
ABOVE-THE-LINE PERSONNEL IN FILM BY GENDER
MEASURES MEN WOMEN TOTAL
Directors 76.9% (n=100) 23.1% (n=30) 130
Writers 74.8% (n=151) 25.2% (n=51) 202
Producers 71% (n=306) 29% (n=125) 431
Total 73% (n=557) 27% (n=206) 763
Behind the Camera
Given the findings above, we were curious about the frequency of women working behind the camera across Netflix films and
scripted series. For this section, the analytics were handled differently for film and series. Above-the-line personnel were assessed
at the episode level for scripted series but the story level for film. Using this approach, the sample sizes for specific roles behind
the camera in series (i.e., director, writer) were quite large and thus would skew or mask overall and film-based findings. As such,
we reported results for each medium separately.
Film. A total of 763 above-the-line personnel (i.e., directors, writers, producers) were evaluated across the 126 movies.10 Looking
at specific positions, a total of 130 directors helmed the movie sample. A full 76.9% of directors were men (n=100) and 23.1%
(n=30) were women (see Table 7), which translated to a gender ratio of 3.3 male helmers to every 1 female. The percentage of
women directors non meaningfully decreased from 2018 (25%, n=18) to 2019 (20.7%, n=12). Interestingly, no women directors
were hired to helm horror or sci-fi/fantasy films across the 2-year movie sample.
How did Netflix employment statistics of women helmers compare to those found across the 100 top-grossing films of 2018 and
2019? As shown in Figure 1, Netflix films (2018=25%, n=18, 2019=20.7%, n=12) featured a substantially higher percentage of wom-
en directors than did top-grossing fictional films (2018=4.5%, n=5, 2019=10.7%, n=12) across the sample time frame.
Pivoting to screenwriters, a total of 202 were credited across the 126 movies. Seventy-five percent of writers were men (74.8%,
n=151) and 25% were women (25.2%, n=51). As shown in Table 8, the percentage and number of women writers was non-mean-
ingfully lower in 2019 (23%, n=23) than in 2018 (27.5%,
n=28). Netflix had a significantly higher percentage of FIGURE 1
women screenwriters (25.2%, n=51) than did top-gross- PERCENTAGE OF WOMEN DIRECTORS IN NETFLIX AND
ing films overall (16.7%, n=73), however. Women writers TOP-GROSSING
FIGURE 1 FILMS
of Netflix films were more prevalent in 2018 (27.5%, n=28) PERCENTAGE OF WOMEN DIRECTORS IN NETFLIX AND TOP-GROSSING FILMS BY YEAR
than were women writers of top-grossing movies (13.7%, 25%
n=31). The gap reduced to non significance in 2019, howev-
er (Netflix women writers=23%, n=23, top-grossing wom- 20.7%
en writers=19.8%, n=42).
In addition to directors and writers, producing credits were 10.7%
assessed for gender. Only creatives credited as Producers
(e.g., Produced by) without any modifiers (e.g., Executive, 4.5%
Co, Associate) were included in the analysis. This narrow
approach was taken purposely, to focus on those individu-
2018 2019 2018 2019
als responsible for films coming in on time and within bud-
get. Netflix Films Top-Grossing Films
Page 4TABLE
TABLE 8 8
PERCENTAGE OF WOMEN ABOVE THE LINE IN FILM BY YEAR
MEASURES 2018 2019 TOTAL
Directors 25% (n=18) 20.7% (n=12) 23.1% (n=30)
Writers 27.5% (n=28) 23% (n=23) 25.2% (n=51)
Producers 28.6% (n=72) 29.6% (n=53) 29% (n=125)
A total of 431 producers were credited across the 126 movies, with 71% men (n=306) and 29% women (n=125). No differences
emerged by year (2018=28.6%, n=72, 2019=29.6%, n=53). See Table 8. Only 19% (n=130) of producers were women across 200
top-grossing films, with 21.5% (n=73) in 2019 and 16.6% (n=57) in 2018. As such, Netflix was substantially higher than the industry
norm on hiring women producers to carry film projects to completion.
Was having a woman behind the camera associated with gender prevalence on screen? To answer this query, we bifurcated the
sample into two groups. Starting with directors, every film was coded as having at least one woman director attached or not. Then,
we looked at the percentage of female-identified
film leads/co leads, main cast and speaking char- FIGURE 2
acters across these two groups. The same process PERCENTAGE OF FEMALE-IDENTIFIED FIGURE 2 LEADS, MAIN CAST AND
PERCENTAGE OF FEMALE-IDENTIFIED LEADS, MAIN CAST AND SPEAKING CHARACTERS
was repeated for screenwriters and producers. SPEAKING CHARACTERS BY DIRECTOR GENDER
BY DIRECTOR GENDER
Not surprisingly, the results revealed that having 75.9%
a woman behind the scenes in a leadership po-
sition matters. Figure 2 reveals that films with at
least one woman director attached had signifi- 49% 45.9%
cantly more girls and women on screen as leads/ 40.2% 37% 33.7%
co leads (75.9%, n=22, vs. 40.2%, n=39), main
cast (49%, n=122, vs. 37%, n=289) and speaking
characters (45.9%, n=436, vs. 33.7%, n=1,261)
than films without a woman director attached.
The same pattern held with stories penned by
Female-Identified Female-Identified Female-Identified
women screenwriters in comparison to stories Leads/Co Leads Main Cast Speaking Characters
without any women screenwriters on board: fe-
male-identified leads/co leads (70.7%, n=29, vs. Women-Directed Men-Directed
37.6%, n=32), main cast members (47%, n=163
vs. 36.3%, n=248), and speaking characters
(42%, n=577, vs. 33.7%, n=1,120).
TABLE 9
TABLE 9
PERCENTAGE OF FEMALE-IDENTIFIED LEADS, MAIN CAST
AND SPEAKING CHARACTERS BY CONTENT CREATOR GENDER
WRITERS PRODUCERS
FEMALE-IDENTIFIED Woman No Woman Woman No Woman
ROLE Writer Writer Producer Producer
Attached Attached Attached Attached
Leads/Co Leads 70.7% (n=29) 37.6% (n=32) 56.4% (n=44) 35.4% (n=17)
Main Cast 47% (n=163) 36.3% (n=248) 43% (n=278) 34.7% (n=133)
Speaking Characters 42% (n=577) 33.7% (n=1,120) 37.7% (n=1,115) 33.4% (n=582)
Page 5With film producers, two of the three comparisons were significant: female-identified leads/co leads (Women Produced=56.4%,
n=44 vs. Men Produced=35.4%, n=17) and main cast (Women Produced=43%, n=248, Men Produced=34.7%, n=133). A difference
that approached significance but fell short of the 5-percentage point criterion was observed on all speaking characters (37.7%,
n=1,115, vs. 33.4%, n=582), however. Taken together, across 8 out of 9 analyses, having a woman in a leadership position behind
the camera was associated with greater inclusion across three different types of film roles.
In total, the findings from this section illuminated that Netflix hired or green lit stories with women behind the camera above film
industry norms. This is particularly the case with women directors and writers, challenging much of the mythologizing around who
can carry a movie or the availability of the pipeline. These hiring practices matter, as content with women behind the camera was
associated with more girls and women on screen in leading roles as well as across the entire ecosystem of the story. The results
also revealed that men’s casting decisions were less likely to be gender inclusive than women’s casting decisions.
TABLE 10 10
TABLE
ABOVE-THE-LINE PERSONNEL IN SCRIPTED SERIES BY GENDER
MEASURES MEN WOMEN TOTAL
Creators 70.2% (n=186) 29.8% (n=79) 265
Producers 63.3% (n=1,025) 36.7% (n=594) 1,619
Writers 63.6% (n=1,682) 36.4% (n=963) 2,645
Directors 72.3% (n=1,205) 27.7% (n=461) 1,666
Total 66.2% (n=4,098) 33.8% (n=2,097) 6,195
Scripted Series. Creators, producers, writers and directors were assessed across every episode of each Netflix series included in
the sample.11 A total of 6,195 above-the-line personnel were evaluated. Overall, 66.2% of these jobs were held by men (n=4,098)
and 33.8% by women (n=2,097). Table 10 reveals the breakdown of gender by position and Table 11 illuminates the percentage of
women holding these posts by year.12
In terms of leadership, the top position in scripted series was show creators. Just under a third of these prestigious roles were
held by women (29.8%, n=79). A significant uptick was observed in the percentage of women show creators from 2018 (26.9%,
n=32) to 2019 (32.2%, n=47). According to the SDSU report, women accounted for 22% of show creators across broadcast, cable,
and digital series in 2017/18 and 25% in 2018/19 season.13 Hence, Netflix hired and showcased the work of women creators signifi-
cantly more than their industry counterparts during the years evaluated.
TABLE
TABLE 11 11
PERCENTAGE OF WOMEN ABOVE THE LINE IN SCRIPTED SERIES BY YEAR
MEASURES 2018 2019 TOTAL
Creators 26.9% (n=32) 32.2% (n=47) 29.8% (n=79)
Producers 33.3% (n=246) 39.5% (n=348) 36.7% (n=594)
Writers 30.6% (n=373) 41.3% (n=590) 36.4% (n=963)
Directors 25.1% (n=191) 29.9% (n=270) 27.7% (n=461)
Page 6Turning to producers, we examined credited individuals with the ‘Producer’ moniker in their title working across the majority of
the season. A full 63.3% of credited producers were men (n=1,025) and 36.7% were women (n=594). A higher percentage and
number of women were credited as producers in Netflix series in 2019 (39.5%, n=348) than in 2018 (33.3%, n=246). In comparison
to statistics on producers from SDSU for the 2017/18 season, Netflix employed fewer women in producing roles (33%) in 2018 than
the wider industry (40%) but kept pace with the industry norm in 2019 (40%).
To further understand women’s participation as producers across the sample, we evaluated specific credits within this moniker
by gender. As shown in Table 12, women’s participation as producers increased as the prestige of their credits decreased. Almost
one-third (31.6%, n=237) of executive producers and 39.3% (n=77) of co-executive producers were women, while women held
55.1% (n=27) of supervising producer credits.
Forty-three percent (43.3%, n=103) of all pro- TABLE 12
ducers and co-producers (n=58) were women PRODUCING CREDITS IN SCRIPTEDTABLE SERIES 12 BY GENDER
and 46.6% (n=27) of line producers were wom-
en. MEASURES MEN WOMEN
Executive Producer 68.4% (n=514) 31.6% (n=237)
Two positions were examined to understand if
and how women’s employment as Producers Co-Executive Producer 60.7% (n=119) 39.3% (n=77)
on Netflix series changed over time. These roles
Supervising Producer 44.9% (n=22) 55.1% (n=27)
have been tracked by SDSU and reflect roles
with decision-making ability in series. The per- Producer 56.7% (n=135) 43.3% (n=103)
centage of Executive Producers in Netflix series
Co-Producer 57% (n=77) 43% (n=58)
in 2018 (28.9%, n=101) was not meaningfully
different than Executive Producers in the wider Line Producer 53.4% (n=31) 46.6% (n=27)
industry (26%). This trend continued in 2019,
when 33.9% (n=136) of Executive Producers on
Netflix series were women compared to 30% in
the broader industry ecosystem. Among Producers, Netflix hired slightly more women in 2018 (44.8%, n=47) than its industry
peers (40%). This was also the case in 2019, though both differences were not significant. Forty-two percent of producers on
Netflix series (42.1%, n=56) were women compared to 40% of producers industry wide.
Looking to writers, the credited writer for each episode of a series was examined (n=2,645). In total, 63.6% (n=1,682) of writers
were men and 36.4% were women (n=963). As shown in Table 11, the percentage of women writers increased substantially from
2018 (30.6%, n=373) to 2019 (41.3%, n=590). Netflix (36.4%, n=963) significantly outpaced the industry (30%) in terms of hiring
women writers overall, as well as in 2018 (30.6% vs. 25%) and in 2019 (41.3% vs. 35%). Even as the industry increased hiring of
women writers, Netflix exceeded that rate.
The last behind-the-camera position evaluated was directors. Each series episode was examined, with a total of 1,666 directors
included in the analysis. Men (72.3%, n=1,205) were more likely to direct Netflix series than women (27.7%, n=461), which calcu-
lated to a gender ratio of 2.6 to 1 (see Table 10). The participation of women directors of Netflix series non meaningfully increased
over time, as 25.1% (n=191) of directors in 2018 were women compared to 29.9% (n=270) in 2019 (see Table 11). Overall, Netflix
(27.7%) was on par with the wider industry (28%) in its hiring patterns for women directors.14 There was no difference between the
percentage of women directors working on Netflix series in 2018 (25.1%) and what the DGA reported for the industry in the 2017-18
season (25%). Netflix (29.9%) was slightly lower than the DGA figures for the 2018-19 season (31%).
The final analysis conducted in this section examined the relationship between gender of show creators and gender of on-screen
portrayals. Each series was placed into one of two categories: those with at least one-woman creator attached or those without
any attached. Then, we analyzed the percentage of female-identifying characters and series regulars in each of these categories.
We also conducted the same analysis with writers.
As shown in Figure 3, scripted series with at least one-woman creator attached featured more female-identified leads, series regu-
lars and speaking characters. Two-thirds (74.6%, n=53) of series with a woman creator featured girls and women in at least half of
the series regular roles, versus only 41% (n=43) of series with only men creators. In terms of series regulars, over half of recurring
cast (56.2%, n=304) were female-identified in shows that were created by women. Shows without a woman creator attached only
Page 7staffed 41.5% (n=354) of the recurring cast with female-identified series regulars. Finally, women creators filled 45.9% (n=1,332)
of speaking roles with girls/women. Male show creators, on the other hand, depicted girls/women on screen in 37.1% (n=1,697) of
all speaking roles. These results point to the clear influence that women in creative roles can have on achieving gender equality
on screen.
3 FIGURE
FIGURE 3
PERCENTAGE OF FEMALE-IDENTIFIED LEADS/CO LEADS,
SERIES REGULARS AND SPEAKING CHARACTERS BY SERIES CREATOR GENDER
74.6%
56.2%
41.5% 45.9%
41%
37.1%
Female-Identified Female-Identified Female-Identified
Leads/Co Leads Main Cast Speaking Characters
At Least 1 Woman Creator No Women Creators
The same analysis was conducted for writers.15 Here, series with at least one credited woman writer (n=113) across the first three
episodes were compared to those without any women writing on the first three episodes (n=63). In terms of the leads/co leads,
61.1% (n=69) of series with a woman writer featured female-identified characters in at least half of the cast, compared to 42.9%
(n=27) of series without women writers. This trend continued with series regulars. Half (50.8%, n=458) of series regulars were girls
or women when one or more women writers worked on the episodes evaluated. In comparison, 40.7% (n=200) of series regulars
were women when there were no women writers. Finally, for all speaking characters, 42.3% (n=2,011) of characters were girls/
women when a woman writer was present versus 37.4% (n=1,018) of characters when no woman writer was employed. As with
creators, women in this critical behind the scenes role impact the inclusion profile on screen in Netflix series.
Behind the camera in Netflix series, women represented roughly a third of the individuals hired to bring these shows to life. Impor-
tantly, Netflix saw gains over time in its hiring practices for women across all four positions evaluated (i.e., creator, writer, produc-
er, director). The company also outpaced the industry in its hiring practices for three of these four positions—only on directors
was Netflix on par with or slightly below DGA findings. The presence of women as series creators and episode writers was related
to seeing more girls and women on screen. As with film, the burden of responsibility to improve casting percentages for women
rests primarily with men in series creator and writer roles.
Overall, this section reveals the extent to which Netflix values storytelling by and about girls and women. Fictional films and
episodic series present girls and women in key roles on screen. Netflix can improve inclusion of female-identified main cast and
speaking characters, but as the behind-the-camera analysis shows, men in positions of influence must do more to include girls
and women on screen. Netflix outflanked the film industry in its inclusion of women in above-the-line roles, and often outpaced
the industry in its employment of women behind-the-scenes in series. While these findings demonstrate Netflix’s ongoing com-
mitment to stories centered on and by women, there were still pieces of the picture missing. Intersecting gender and race/ethnic-
ity can illuminate where there continues to be bias and hiring gaps in the industry. As a result, the next section addresses another
historically marginalized community with a particular emphasis on how women from underrepresented racial/ethnic groups fare
on screen and behind the camera.
Page 8FILM SERIES
MEASURE TOTAL
2018 2019
RACE/ETHNICITY 2018 2019
% of underrepresented
This section illuminates
31.9% 40.4% 21.5% 35.4% 31.9%
the prevalence of race/ethnicity on screen and behind the camera in Netflix films and scripted series. Be-
leads/co leads (n=22) (n=23) (n=17) (n=34) (n=96)
low, we map out how underrepresented status (i.e., white vs. underrepresented racial/ethnic group) was associated with specific
measures as well TOTAL 35.7%
as medium (films vs. scripted series), year (2018 29.1%(males,
(n=45) vs. 2019), and gender females) differences. At the end
(n=51)
of the section, we provide a deeper dive into specific racial/ethnic groups.
TABLE 13
PERCENTAGE OF UNDERREPRESENTED LEADS/CO LEADS BY STORYTELLING MEDIUM AND YEAR
FILM SERIES
INDICATOR 2018 2019 2018 2019 TOTAL
31.9% 40.4% 21.5% 35.4% 31.9%
% of underrepresented
leads/co leads
(n=22) (n=23) (n=17) (n=34) (n=96)
TOTAL 35.7% (n=45) 29.1% (n=51)
On Screen
Leads/co leads, main cast and speaking characters were assessed for race/ethnicity. A modified version of the U.S. Census cate-
gorizations (i.e., White, Black, Hispanic/Latino, Asian, Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander, Middle Eastern/North African, American
Indian/Alaskan Native, multiracial/multiethnic) was used to evaluate characters’ racial/ethnic grouping.16 Then, this measure was
collapsed into two categories: white vs. underrepresented (UR).
TABLE 14
TABLE 14
PERCENTAGE OF LEADS/CO LEADS BY RACIAL/ETHNIC GROUP AND STORYTELLING MEDIUM
MEASURE FILM SERIES TOTAL U.S. CENSUS
White 64.3% (n=81) 77.1% (n=135) 71.8% (n=216) 60.1%
Black/African American 18.3% (n=23) 9.1% (n=16) 13% (n=39) 13.4%
Hispanic/Latino 6.3% (n=8) 3.4% (n=6) 4.7% (n=14) 18.5%
Asian 4% (n=5) 1.1% (n=2) 2.3% (n=7) 5.9%
Middle Eastern/North African 1.6% (n=2) 1.1% (n=2) 1.3% (n=4) 1.1%
American Indian/Alaskan Native 0 0 0 1.3%
Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander 0TABLE1515
TABLE
PERCENTAGE OF UNDERREPRESENTED LEADS/CO LEADS IN NETFLIX AND TOP-GROSSING FILMS BY YEAR
INDICATOR 2018 2019 TOTAL
% of Netflix films w/an
underrepresented leads/co lead
31.9% 40.4% 35.7%
(n=22) (n=23) (n=45)
% of top-grossing films w/an 27% 29% 28%
underrepresented leads/co lead (n=27) (n=29) (n=56)
Note: A total of 126 Netflix films were included in the analysis and 200 top-grossing fictional films in 2018 (n=100) and 2019 (n=100). Both
of these samples had movies driven by ensemble casts. While the ensemble films were counted in the sample total, they could not qualify
as underrepresented-led or not. This latter distinction was reserved for films driven by only one or two (equal) protagonists.
As noted earlier, only comparable industry data was available for leads/co leads in film. Netflix featured significantly more under-
represented leads/co leads than did top-grossing films across the same time frame (see Table 15). The gap was particularly large
for 2019, where Netflix outpaced top-grossing fare by 11.4 percentage points (40.4% vs. 29%).
TABLE 16 16
TABLE
PERCENTAGE OF UNDERREPRESENTED LEADS/CO LEADS BY STORYTELLING MEDIUM AND GENDER
INDICATOR FILM SERIES
% of underrepresented
male-identified leads/co leads
19% 10%
(n=24) (n=18)
% of underrepresented 19% 9%
female-identified leads/co leads (n=24) (n=16)
FIGURE 4 The above findings focus on underrepresented status alone,
PERCENTAGE OF UNDERREPRESENTED LEADS/CO-LEADS not in combination with gender. Here, we cross these two
FIGURE 4
IN NETFLIX
PERCENTAGE AND TOP-GROSSING
OF UNDERREPRESENTED FILMS
LEADS/CO LEADS BY GENDER
IN NETFLIX AND measures to gain insight on the similarities and differences
TOP-GROSSING FILMS BY GENDER in access and opportunity for men and women of color on
Netflix fare.
Netflix Films
42.1%
Top-Grossing Films
As shown in Table 16, there was no difference in the num-
35%
30.2% 28.5% ber and percentage of male and female leads/co leads from
underrepresented racial/ethnic groups driving the sto-
19% 19% rylines in film. The percentage of underrepresented leads/
17%
12%
co leads was lower in scripted series where men of color
(10.3%, n=18) had slightly more roles than women of color
(9.1%, n=16) as protagonists. U.S. Census reveals that 20%
of the population is composed of underrepresented males
White White UR UR and 20% underrepresented females.18 As such, film is just
Males Females Males Females
shy of proportional representation, but scripted series was
Note: Underrepresented status reflects the central character in the story. Only human substantially below this benchmark. The breakdown of un-
or anthropomorphized characters with an ascertainable race/ethnicity were included. derrepresented status by gender for Netflix and top-gross-
Percentages do not sum to 100% as films with ensemble leads are not included and ing film leads/co leads can be found in Figure 4.
heterogenous co leads were counted in each respective category.
Page 10main cast (n=175) (n=184) (n=175) (n=284) (n=818)
TOTAL 35.4% (n=359) 33.1% (n=459)
TABLE 17
PERCENTAGE OF UNDERREPRESENTED MAIN CAST BY STORYTELLING MEDIUM AND YEAR
FILM SERIES
INDICATOR 2018 2019 2018 2019 TOTAL
32.3% 38.9% 27% 38.4% 34.1%
% of underrepresented
main cast
(n=175) (n=184) (n=175) (n=284) (n=818)
TOTAL 35.4% (n=359) 33.1% (n=459)
Turning to the main cast across film and scripted series, a full 65.9% (n=1,583) were White, 15.7% (n=376) Black, 4.8% (n=116)
Hispanic/Latino, 4.7% (n=112) Asian, 1.7% (n=41) Middle Eastern/North African,TABLE 1919
TABLE
PERCENTAGE OF MAIN CAST BY UNDERREPRESENTED STATUS, STORYTELLING MEDIUM AND YEAR
FILM SERIES U.S.
MEASURE TOTAL
2018 2019 2018 2019 CENSUS
% of white males 40.2% 37.2% 40.2% 32.7% 37.3% 30%
(n=218) (n=176) (n=260) (n=242) (n=896)
% of white females 27.5% 23.9% 32.8% 28.8% 28.6% 30%
(n=149) (n=113) (n=212) (n=213) (n=687)
% of underrepresented males 20.5% 21.8% 13.3% 19.4% 18.5% 20%
(n=111) (n=103) (n=86) (n=143) (n=443)
% of underrepresented females 11.8% 17.1% 13.8% 19.1% 15.6% 20%
(n=64) (n=81) (n=89) (n=141) (n=375)
Focusing on speaking characters (n=11,678), 63.8% (n=7,445) were White, 17.1% (n=1,993) Black, 5.9% (n=685) Hispanic/Lati-
no, 6.2% (n=723) Asian,TABLE 21
PERCENTAGE OF SPEAKING CHARACTERSTABLE 21
BY UNDERREPRESENTED STATUS, GENDER,
STORYTELLING MEDIUM AND YEAR
FILM SERIES U.S.
MEASURE TOTAL
2018 2019 2018 2019 CENSUS
% of white males 41.8% 38.8% 41% 37.8% 39.7% 30%
(n=999) (n=824) (n=1,351) (n=1,461) (n=4,635)
% of white females 22.4% 21% 27% 24.3% 24.1% 30%
(n=536) (n=446) (n=890) (n=938) (n=2,810)
% of underrepresented males 21.7% 24.7% 18.8% 20.8% 21.1% 20%
(n=518) (n=524) (n=619) (n=805) (n=2,446)
% of underrepresented females 14.2% 15.6% 13.2% 17.1% 15.1% 20%
(n=339) (n=331) (n=434) (n=663) (n=1,767)
In terms of visibility, the number and percentage of Netflix films and scripted series missing at least one or more speaking or
named characters from specific racial/ethnic groups was depicted in Table 23. Almost all Netflix stories portrayed White speaking
characters whereas almost no stories portrayed Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islanders and American Indian/Alaskan Natives. Roughly
three-quarters of the films and series erased Middle Eastern/North African (MENA) characters and roughly half rendered Hispan-
ic/Latinos invisible. In Table 24, we illuminated how many films and series erased female-identified characters by race/ethnicity.
Fifteen out of 16 cells indicate that when we only focus on women and girls, the numbers become more dire reflecting greater
erasure (see Table 24).
Taken together, this section revealed a few major trends. In terms of leads/co leads, Netflix was near or at proportional represen-
tation for race/ethnicity particularly in film. Similarly, main cast and all speaking characters in film and series were at or just below
proportional representation in 2019. One problematic area pertained to invisibility, with a significant number and percentage of
stories across film and scripted series erasing people of color – particularly women and girls from underrepresented racial/ethnic
groups.
TABLE 22
TABLE 22 BY STORYTELLING MEDIUM AND YEAR
RACIAL/ETHNIC PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATION
FILM SERIES TOTAL
11.6% 8.8% 7.5% 16% 11.4%
OR 8 OR 5 OR 6 OR 16 OR 35
FILMS FILMS SERIES SERIES STORIES
2018 2019 2018 2019 2018-19
18 Films 23 films 13 series 29 series 83 stories
exceeded exceeded exceeded exceeded exceeded
proportional proportional proportional proportional proportional
representation representation representation representation representation
ACROSS 2 YEARS, 38.6% OR 118 FILMS AND SCRIPTED SERIES MET OR EXCEEDED PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATION
Page 13TABLE 23
TABLE 23
PERCENTAGE AND NUMBER OF NETFLIX FILMS AND SCRIPTED SERIES MISSING RACIAL/ETHNIC GROUPS
Measure White H/L Black Asian AI/AN NHPI MENA Multi
% of films w/out 1.6% 54% 18.3% 40.5% 96.8% 95.2% 75.4% 42.9%
speaking characters
# of films 2 68 23 51 122 120 95 54
% of series w/out
speaking characters
1.1% 47.8% 10% 27.2% 93.9% 94.4% 71.7% 30.6%
# of series 2 86 18 49 169 170 129 55
Note: H/L refers to Hispanic/Latino; AI/AN refers to American Indian/Alaskan Native; NHPI refers to Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander; MENA refers to Middle
Eastern/North African; and Multi refers to Multiracial/Multiethnic.
TABLE 24
TABLE 24
PERCENTAGE AND NUMBER OF NETFLIX FILMS AND SCRIPTED SERIES
MISSING GIRLS AND WOMEN BY RACIAL/ETHNIC GROUPS
Measure White Latina Black Asian AI/AN NHPI MENA Multi
% of films w/out 4.8% 72.2% 31.7% 56.3% 96.8% 97.6% 88.9% 55.6%
speaking characters
# of films 6 91 40 71 122 123 112 70
% of series w/out
speaking characters
4.4% 65.6% 27.2% 42.2% 96.7% 96.1% 88.9% 38.3%
# of series 8 118 49 76 174 173 160 69
Note: AI/AN refers to American Indian/Alaskan Native; NHPI refers to Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander; MENA refers to Middle Eastern/North African; and Multi
refers to Multiracial/Multiethnic.
Behind the Camera
As with gender, we scrutinized the distribution of race/ethnicity behind the camera on Netflix films and series. As noted earlier, film
and series metrics are reported separately.
Film. There were 762 personnel in above-the-line roles across the 126 Netflix films evaluated.20 Focusing on directors, more than
80% of helmers were white (83.1%, n=108) and 16.9% (n=22) were from underrepresented racial/ethnic groups (See Table 25).
This is a ratio of 4.9 white directors for every 1 underrepresented director. There was no change from 2018 (16.7%, n=12) to 2019
(17.2%, n=10) in the percentage of underrepresented directors of Netflix films. The percentage of Netflix directors did not signifi-
cantly differ from top-grossing films in the same time frame (see Figure 5).
TABLE 25 25
TABLE
ABOVE-THE-LINE PERSONNEL IN FILM BY UNDERREPRESENTED STATUS
MEASURES WHITE UR TOTAL
Directors 83.1% (n=108) 16.9% (n=22) 130
Writers 83.6% (n=168) 16.4% (n=33) 201
Producers 87% (n=375) 13% (n=56) 431
Total 85.4% (n=651) 14.6% (n=111) 762
Page 14The specific racial/ethnic breakdown for directors was: 83.1% (n=108) white, 8.5% (n=11) Black/Af- FIGURE 5 rican American, 3.1% (n=4) Hispanic/Latino,
TABLE 28 28
TABLE
NETFLIX FILM WRITERS BY UNDERREPRESENTED STATUS AND GENDER BY YEAR
UNDERREPRESENTED STATUS 2018 2019 TOTAL
White Men 61.4% (n=62) 63% (n=63) 62.2% (n=125)
White Women 24.8% (n=25) 18% (n=18) 21.4% (n=43)
UR Men 10.9% (n=11) 14% (n=14) 12.4% (n=25)
UR Women 3% (n=3) 5% (n=5) 4% (n=8)
We also examined writers with an intersectional lens (See Table 28). Men and women of color were least likely to work as writers
on Netflix films. There was no meaningful difference by year for underrepresented men (2018=10.9%, n=11, 2019=14%, n=14), nor
for underrepresented women (2018=3%, n=3, 2019=5%, n=5). There were also no significant differences between Netflix writers
and top-grossing films in terms of underrepresented men in 2018 (Netflix=10.9%, top-grossing=9.8%) or 2019 (Netflix=14%,
top-grossing=9.9%), or for underrepresented women in either year (2018=3% vs. 1.3%, 2019=5% vs. 3.3%).
Producing credits (e.g., Produced by) were also evaluated. Of the 431 producers of Netflix films, 87% (n=375) were white and 13%
(n=56) were underrepresented. From 2018 (14.7%, n=37) to 2019 (10.6%, n=19) the percentage of underrepresented producers of
Netflix content declined non-significantly. In comparison to top-grossing films, in 2018 there was no significant difference in the
percentage of underrepresented producers of Netflix content (14.7%) compared to top-grossing movies (11.3%). In 2019, how-
ever, significantly fewer underrepresented producers (10.6%) worked on Netflix films compared to top-grossing movies (19%).
TABLE 29 29
TABLE
NETFLIX FILM PRODUCERS BY UNDERREPRESENTED STATUS, GENDER AND YEAR
UNDERREPRESENTED STATUS 2018 2019 TOTAL
White Men 63.1% (n=159) 64.2% (n=115) 63.6% (n=274)
White Women 22.2% (n=56) 25.1% (n=45) 23.4% (n=101)
UR Men 8.3% (n=21) 6.1% (n=11) 7.4% (n=32)
UR Women 6.3% (n=16) 4.5% (n=8) 5.6% (n=24)
The specific racial/ethnic breakdown for producers was: 87% (n=375) white, 4.2% (n=18) Black/African American, 2.6% (n=11)
Hispanic/Latino, 3.5% (n=15) Asian,Figure 6 shows the results of this analysis. Films with
FIGURE 6 one or more underrepresented directors attached
PERCENTAGE OF UNDERREPRESENTED LEADS, MAIN CAST were far more likely to feature underrepresented
AND SPEAKING FIGURECHARACTERS
6 leads/co leads (86.4%, n=19 vs. 25%, n=26), un-
PERCENTAGE OF UNDERREPRESENTED LEADS, MAIN CAST AND SPEAKING CHARACTERS derrepresented main cast (68.1%, n=109 vs. 29.2%,
BY DIRECTOR UNDERREPRESENTED
BY DIRECTOR UNDERREPRESENTED STATUS STATUS
n=250), and underrepresented speaking charac-
ters (67.1%, n=566 vs. 31.2%, n=1,146) than those
86.4% without an underrepresented director attached.
The screenwriting analysis revealed the same pat-
68.1% 67.1% tern. Underrepresented writers were associated
with more underrepresented film leads/co leads
(76%, n=19 vs. 25.7%, n=26), main cast members
25% 29.2% 31.2% (61.3%, n=119 vs. 29.2%, n=240), and all speaking
characters (60.7%, n=541 vs. 32.3%, n=1,171) than
white scribes. For producers, the same differences
emerged for underrepresented vs. white producers
UR UR UR across the three groups (leads/co leads, 70.6%,
Leads/Co Leads Main Cast Speaking Characters n=24 vs. 22.8%, n=21, main cast, 51.8%, n=144 vs.
29.2%, n=215, speaking characters 53.4%, n=770
UR-Directed White-Directed
vs. 30.6%, n=942).
Put differently, across 7 of 9 analyses, underrepresented creatives featured more than double the percentage of underrepre-
sented leads, main cast and speaking characters than white directors did. Clearly, underrepresented content creators were more
inclusive than their white counterparts when it comes to storytelling and casting. Although more white directors worked on Netflix
films, they contributed less to the on-screen inclusion profile of Netflix content. Hiring practices behind the camera should take
into account the need for inclusion on screen across all content.
The findings regarding film reveal that underrepresented content creators in above-the-line roles on Netflix films fell mostly below
industry norms, though this varied from year-to-year. Most importantly, there was a clear relationship between an underrepre-
sented creator behind the scenes and on screen casting choices. When underrepresented individuals worked behind the camera,
there were more underrepresented characters as leads/co leads, main cast, and speaking characters—in most cases, more than
twice as many. This suggests that underrepresented creatives were primarily responsible for the on-screen inclusion in Netflix
films.
TABLE 30
TABLE
PERCENTAGE OF UNDERREPRESENTED LEADS, 30 CAST AND SPEAKING CHARACTERS IN FILM
MAIN
BY UNDERREPRESENTED STATUS
WRITERS PRODUCERS
UNDERREPRESENTED UR No UR UR No UR
ROLE Writer Writer Producer Producer
Attached Attached Attached Attached
Leads/Co Leads 76% (n=19) 25.7% (n=26) 70.6% (n=24) 22.8% (n=21)
Main Cast 61.3% (n=119) 29.2% (n=240) 51.8% (n=144) 29.2% (n=215)
Speaking Characters 60.7% (n=541) 32.3% (n=1,171) 53.4% (n=770) 30.6% (n=942)
Scripted Series. We assessed the creators, producers, writers, and directors of every episode of each Netflix series in the sample.
Of the 6,155 personnel evaluated, 82.7% (n=5,092) were white and 17.3% (n=1,063) were from an underrepresented racial/ethnic
group. This did not change over time; in 2018, 14.8% (n=415) of positions went to underrepresented individuals and in 2019, 19.4%
(n=648) of positions did. Table 31 provides the breakdown of each position by underrepresented status.
Page 17Beginning with creators, 87.8% (n=231) were white and 12.2% (n=32) were underrepresented overall. This varied significantly by
year, as 7.6% (n=9) of creators in 2018 were underrepresented but 15.9% (n=23) in 2019 were. Netflix series in 2018 were on par
with underrepresented series creators overall (9%), based on the UCLA Hollywood Diversity Report (2017-18).21 In 2019, Netflix
(16%) was not meaningfully different from the industry (11.8%) in its work with underrepresented series creators.
TABLE 31 31
TABLE
ABOVE-THE-LINE PERSONNEL IN SCRIPTED SERIES BY UNDERREPRESENTED STATUS
MEASURES WHITE UR TOTAL
Creators 87.8% (n=231) 12.2% (n=32) 263
Producers 85% (n=1,352) 15% (n=238) 1,590
Writers 82.6% (n=2,178) 17.4% (n=458) 2,636
Directors 79.9% (n=1,331) 20.1% (n=335) 1,666
TABLE 32
TABLE 32
PERCENTAGE OF UNDERREPRESENTED ABOVE-THE-LINE PERSONNEL IN SCRIPTED SERIES BY YEAR
MEASURES 2018 2019
Creators 7.6% (n=9) 15.9% (n=23)
Producers 12.9% (n=93) 16.7% (n=145)
Writers 13.9% (n=168) 20.3% (n=290)
Directors 19% (n=145) 21% (n=190)
Total 14.8% (n=415) 19.4% (n=648)
The specific racial/ethnic breakdown for creators was: 87.8% (n=231) white, 6.1% (n=16) were Black/African American, 2.3% (n=6)
were Hispanic/Latino,Among producers, 85% (n=1,352) were white and 15% (n=238) were underrepresented. This was consistent over time, as 12.9%
(n=93) of producers in 2018 were underrepresented compared to 16.7% (n=145) in 2019. Netflix (12.9%) fell significantly below the
industry average in 2018 (WGA=26.4%) and in 2019 (Netflix=16.7%, WGA=39.4%) for underrepresented producers.22
The specific racial/ethnic breakdown for producers was: 85% (n=1,352) white, 5% (n=80) were Black/African American, 3.1%
(n=50) were Hispanic/Latino, 2.8% (n=45) were Asian, 1.3% (n=20) were Middle Eastern/North African, and 2.7% (n=43) were
Multiracial/Multiethnic. None of the producers were American Indian/Alaskan Native or Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander.
Crossing the race/ethnicity and gender of producers revealed that 54.3% (n=864) of producing credits went to white men, 30.7%
(n=488) to white women, 8.7% (n=139) to underrepresented men, and 6.2% (n=99) to underrepresented women. Over time, there
was little difference in the prevalence of underrepresented men and women in producing roles. In 2018, 7.5% (n=54) of produc-
ers were underrepresented men which was similar to 2019 (9.8%, n=85). This was also true of underrepresented women in 2018
(5.4%, n=39) and 2019 (6.9%, n=60).
TABLE 34
Table 34 reveals differences by race/ PRODUCING CREDITS IN SCRIPTED
TABLE 34 SERIES BY
ethnicity in the seniority of producing UNDERREPRESENTED STATUS
credits. Underrepresented producers
were most likely to receive Supervising MEASURES WHITE UR
Producer credits (42.9%), followed by
Co-Producer (20.6%) and Co-Executive Executive Producer 87% (n=649) 13% (n=97)
Producer (20%) credits. As a counter-
Co-Executive Producer 80% (n=156) 20% (n=39)
point, underrepresented producers were
least likely to receive Executive Producer Supervising Producer 57.1% (n=28) 42.9% (n=21)
(13%), Line Producer (12%), or Producer
(8.9%) credits. In comparison to the in- Producer 91.1% (n=216) 8.9% (n=21)
dustry as a whole, Netflix had significant-
Co-Producer 79.4% (n=104) 20.6% (n=27)
ly fewer underrepresented Co-Executive
Producers (WGA=28%, Netflix=20%), Line Producer 88% (n=44) 12% (n=6)
Producers (WGA=39%, Netflix=8.9%)
and Co-Producers (WGA=42.5%, Net-
flix=20.6%). There was no difference in the percentage of Executive Producers (WGA=15.5%, Netflix=13%) or Supervising Produc-
ers (WGA=39.5%, Netflix=42.9%).23
Episode writers were examined for race/ethnicity. Of the 2,636 writers credited, 82.6% (n=2,178) of writers were white and 17.4%
(n=458) were underrepresented. This increased significantly over time in Netflix series. In 2018, 13.9% (n=168) of writers were
underrepresented while in 2019, that figure was 20.3% (n=290). Compared to the wider industry (19.7%), in 2018 Netflix (13.9%,
n=168) had significantly fewer underrepresented writers. Netflix closed this gap (20.3%, n=290) and did not differ from the indus-
try at large (23.8%) in the percentage of underrepresented writers working in 2019.24
The specific racial/ethnic breakdown of writers was assessed, with the results presented here: 82.6% (n=2,178) white, 7.4% (n=194)
were Black/African American, 2.2% (n=58) were Hispanic/Latino, 3.5% (n=91) were Asian,TABLE 35
TABLE 35
NETFLIX SERIES DIRECTORS BY UNDERREPRESENTED STATUS, GENDER AND YEAR
UNDERREPRESENTED STATUS 2018 2019 TOTAL
White Men 61.4% (n=468) 55.2% (n=499) 58% (n=967)
White Women 19.6% (n=149) 23.8% (n=215) 21.8% (n=364)
UR Men 13.4% (n=102) 14.8% (n=134) 14.2% (n=236)
UR Women 5.6% (n=43) 6.2% (n=56) 5.9% (n=99)
The specific racial/ethnic breakdown of directors was evaluated. Across the series evaluated, 79.9% (n=1,331) were white, 7.3%
(n=121) were Black/African American,2.8% (n=47) were Hispanic/Latino, 2.3% (n=39) were Asian,SPECIFIC RACIAL/ETHNIC GROUPS
The previous section examined race/ethnicity on screen and behind the camera across Netflix fictional storytelling. Here, we
assess the three largest racial/ethnic groups (i.e., Black, Latinx, Asian, Middle Eastern/North African, American Indian/Alaskan
Native, Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander). We focused on these three groups as they had large enough sample sizes to examine
medium, year, and gender differences. Additionally, we approached the analyses differently than we did in the previous section.27
Rather than using U.S. Census distinctions, we examined whether a character was identified as Black (yes, no), Latinx (yes, no),
Asian (yes, no), Middle Eastern (yes, no), American Indian/Alaskan Native (yes, no), Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander (yes, no).
Characters that were multiracial or multiethnic were recategorized and could count in more than one racial and/or ethnic groups.
Below, we summarize the prevalence of characters (i.e., leads/co leads, main cast) and content creators (i.e., above-the-line
personnel) from these communities. Similar to the previous section, above the line roles were reported separately for film and
scripted series. At the end of this part of the paper, we also summarize briefly the remaining racial/ethnic groups (Middle Eastern/
North African, American Indian/Alaskan Native, Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander) by leads/co leads, main cast and personnel
behind the camera.
TABLE 36
TABLE 36
PERCENTAGE OF BLACK LEADS/CO LEADS BY STORYTELLING MEDIUM AND YEAR
FILM SERIES
MEASURE TOTAL
2018 2019 2018 2019
% of Black 20.3% 22.8% 6.3% 14.4% 15.2%
leads/co leads (n=14) (n=13) (n=5) (n=14) (n=46)
TOTAL 21.4% (n=27) 10.8% (n=19)
Black Cast & Crew
FILM SERIES
On Screen. A total of 15.2% (n=46) of all stories were led/co led with Black protagonists, with film (21.4%, n=27) significantly
INDICATOR 2018 2019 2018 2019 TOTAL
outperforming series (10.8%, n=19). The percentage of all stories centered on Black leads/co leads (15.2%) was in line with the
proportion of the U.S. population that identifies as Black alone or in combination with another race (14.7%) with films notably
20.3% 22.8% 6.3% leads/co14.4%
leads overall, or15.2%
% of Black
higher (+6.7 percentage points).28 There was no change over time for Black for film. Series, however,
leads/co leads
demonstrated a significant jump in Black leads/co
(n=14)leads from 2018 (6.3%, n=5)
(n=13) (n=5) to 2019 (14.4%,
(n=14) n=14). Turning
(n=46) to individual char-
acters, Black leads/co leads were equally likely to be male-identified (51.5%, n=69) and female-identified (48.5%, n=65) across
both film and series.
TOTAL 21.4% (n=27) 10.8% (n=19)
Pivoting to main cast, 19.5% (n=485) were Black with film (20.8%, n=214) and series (18.5%, n=271) showing no meaningful
difference. In comparison to U.S. Census (14.7%), the overall Black main cast (19.5%) was higher in proportion, but just shy of
significant (4.8 percentage points) while film was significantly different (+6.1 percentage points).29 Both film (17.9% to 24.2%) and
series (14.8% to 21.8%) significantly increased the percentage of Black main cast members from 2018 to 2019 (see Table 37). Black
main cast were more likely to be male-identified (61.2%, n=131) than female-identified (38.8%, n=83) in film, although there was
no corresponding difference in series (male-identified: 49.1%, n=133, female-identified: 50.9%, n=138).
TABLE 37 37
TABLE
PERCENTAGE OF BLACK MAIN CAST BY STORYTELLING MEDIUM AND YEAR
FILM SERIES
MEASURE TOTAL
2018 2019 2018 2019
% of Black 17.9% 24.2% 14.8% 21.8% 19.5%
main cast (n=99) (n=115) (n=100) (n=171) (n=485)
TOTAL 20.8% (n=214) 18.5% (n=271)
Page 21
FILM SERIESTABLE 3838
TABLE
PERCENTAGE OF BLACK ABOVE-THE-LINE PERSONNEL BY INDUSTRY AND YEAR
NETFLIX FILMS TOP-GROSSING FILMS
MEASURE
2018 2019 OVERALL 2018 2019 OVERALL
Directors 6.9% 12.1% 9.2% 13.4% 8% 10.7%
(n=5) (n=7) (n=12) (n=15) (n=9) (n=24)
Writers 5% 11% 8% 5.8% 5.2% 5.5%
(n=5) (n=11) (n=16) (n=13) (n=11) (n=24)
Producers 5.2% 5% 5.1% 5.5% 7.1% 6.3%
(n=13) (n=9) (n=22) (n=19) (n=24) (n=43)
Overall 5.4% 8% 6.6% 6.9% 6.7% 6.8%
(n=23) (n=27) (n=50) (n=47) (n=44) (n=91)
Behind-the-camera. In film, 9.2% (n=12) of directors were Black with a significant increase observed from 2018 (6.9%, n=5) to
2019 (12.1%, n=7). This was in contrast to top-grossing films, where a significant decrease occurred from 2018 (13.4%, n=15) to
2019 (8%, n=9). For writers, 8% (n=16) were Black with 2019 significantly higher than 2018. Only 5.5% of top-grossing scribes
were Black with no changes observed by year. There were no differences in Black producers across the industry (i.e., Netflix=5.1%,
n=22, Top-Grossing=6.3%, n=43), year or the intersection of these two measures (see Table 38). Black women comprised 38%
(n=19) of the behind the scenes roles in film and were most likely to work as producers (50%, n=11), followed by writers (31.3%,
n=5), and directors (25%, n=3).
How inclusive were Black content creators when casting Netflix films? Black content creators were responsible for many of the
Black film leads/co leads as well as main cast members across the sample. In movies with a Black director attached, 83.3% (n=10)
of the leads/co leads were Black whereas only 14.9% (n=17) were in films with only non Black directors. A similar jump was ob-
served for main cast members. Films with Black directors accounted for 62.4% (n=58) of Black main cast actors. Movies without
a Black director attached only featured Black actors in 16.7% (n=156) of the main cast. For writers, the same trend emerged. Black
screenwriters were far more inclusive than non Black screenwriters for Black leads/co leads (81.8%, n=9, vs. 15.7%, n=18, respec-
tively) and main cast (65.8%, n=48, vs. 17.4%, n=166,
TABLE 39
respectively). The same pattern appeared with Black
vs. non Black producers as well.30 PERCENTAGE OF BLACK ABOVE-THE-LINE
TABLE 39
PERSONNEL IN
NETFLIX SCRIPTED SERIES BY YEAR
Above-the-line personnel for scripted series can be
NETFLIX SCRIPTED SERIES
found in Table 39. Only 6.5% (n=17) of series creators MEASURE
across the two-year time frame were Black but a sig- 2018 2019 OVERALL
nificant increase emerged from 2018 (2.5%, n=3) to
2019 (9.7%, n=14). No differences were found over Creators 2.5% 9.7% 6.5%
(n=3) (n=14) (n=17)
time for producers, writers, or directors where Black
creatives held 5.6% (n=89), 8.6% (n=226) and 9.3%
(n=155) of all jobs, respectively. Black women held Producers 3.9% 7% 5.6%
(n=28) (n=61) (n=89)
43.1% (n=210) of these behind-the-scenes roles, in-
cluding 29.4% (n=5) of creators, 42.7% (n=38) of pro- 5.7% 11% 8.6%
Writers
ducers, 51.3% (n=116) of writers, and 32.9% (n=51) (n=69) (n=157) (n=226)
of directors. Black creators had a significant impact
on the prevalence of Black series regulars. When a Directors 7.1% 11.2% 9.3%
Black creator was behind a series, 72% (n=59) of se- (n=54) (n=101) (n=155)
ries regulars were Black, while only 15.4% (n=212) of
series regulars were Black when a non-Black creator Overall
5.5% 9.9% 7.9%
(n=154) (n=333) (n=487)
developed a series.
Page 22TABLE 4040
TABLE
PERCENTAGE OF LATINX LEADS/CO LEADS AND MAIN CAST BY STORYTELLING MEDIUM
LEADS/CO LEADS MAIN CAST
MEASURE
FILM SERIES OVERALL FILM SERIES OVERALL
% of Latinx 4% 1.7% 2.6% 3.6% 5.1% 4.5%
(n=5) (n=3) (n=8) (n=37) (n=74) (n=111)
Latinx Cast & Crew
Earlier in the report, we examined all Hispanic/Latino characters independently of their descent or geographical heritage. Here,
we took a more narrow approach. First, we examined Latinos across all racial groups (e.g., White, Black, Indigenous). Then, we
identified creatives on screen and behind the camera who were born in the U.S. or its territories. All those of Spanish origin with-
out other Latino identification were excluded prior to analysis. Given the small number of Latinx roles on screen and employment
patterns behind the camera, we do not focus on over time trends.
As shown in Table 40, only 2.6% of all stories featured Latinx leads/co leads and 4.5% of main cast members were Latinx. Ac-
cording to Pew Research Center and U.S. Census data, 67% of U.S. Hispanic/Latinos are U.S. born.31 Thus, roughly 12% of the U.S.
population could be considered Latinx, a number substantially higher than the percentage of leads and main cast across film and
series. No differences emerged in leads/co leads or main cast members by storytelling medium (see Table 40). Slightly less than
half (42.9%, n=6) of Latinx leads/co leads were girls and women (film: 40%, n=2, series: 44.4%, n=4). Latinx main cast were also
equally likely to be male-identified (50.9%, n=56) as female-identified (49.1%, n=54). Series (53.4%, n=39), however, were more
likely than film (40.5%, n=15) to feature Latinx girls and women in main cast roles.
Focusing on content creators, less than 1% of above-the-line personnel were Latinx. Numerically, one director (You can also read
